1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by xasop on Today at 12:10:12 AM »

If you concede that your opinions don't matter, I shall respectfully agree and we can move on.

My opinions matter just as much as those of the other 447 million people in the EU. That's how democracies work.

Scotland never really understood what being a nation was. They are more a collection of tribes whose only real bond is mutual jealousy of their more prosperous and successful neighbours to the South. England is stable. France is Stable. Portugal is stable. Scotland is a basket case.

Your unabashed imperialism does nothing to bring me to your point of view.

If you don't understand how Germany dominates Europe and the EU via its leverage in the EU, its banks, its trade, its corporations etc, then you won't understand everyone else's fear of getting crushed by them. Germany is the biggest most powerful country in the EU and it flexes its muscles all the time. It imposed the troika on Greece, it imposed the migrant crisis on Italy, refused to let the EU help out Spain, it told Hungary they must take refugees after Germany had the reckless open door immigration policy and when Hungary refused, the Germans pushed to block their regional development funds. And now Germany wants to get rid of the power of veto so that "smaller countries cannot get in the way of policy of larger countries". Germans hold all the top jobs in Europe and the Euro is geared for Germany's economy at the expense of everyone else ... keeping low export costs for German manufacturers and burying those with debts. They control everything. You never read the links I provide but you should read the one below and understand the fear of Germany.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-german-takeover-of-the-eu-is-accelerating

I always read your links. You, however, do not.

None of this explains how 19% of the EU population, which currently has 14% of MEPs and 4% of Commissioners due to the deliberate overrepresentation of smaller countries, can dominate a democratic system. Each individual German voter has the least say in the EU at present. Making the EU fairer would involve increasing Germany's influence. None of this points to German domination, and nothing in your post nor your link contains anything but opinions.

You can stick a Ferrari badge on a Citroen. Its still the same piece of shit underneath.

I'm flattered you think of us Europeans as Ferraris. What does that make you, a Mini?

If you are so convinced I can't change my nationality, why do you associate me with Australia, a country I immigrated to?

No. You don't get to annex a part of the UK. How about we get the rest of Ireland back? It used to be ours.

Níl seans faoin spéir.

Ulster has never ever been a part of the EU ever. So there is nothing to give back. Why would we give Ulster to Germany?

You wouldn't. You would give it back to the Republic of Ireland, which is a member of the EU.

We didn't lose a war. We VOTED to leave. We don't have to hand over territory and we won't.

Actually, you do, under certain circumstances. Have you read the Good Friday Agreement? To paraphrase, it says that if a majority of people in Northern Ireland want reunification, you have to give it to them. We just need to wait for the clown you've put in number 10 to make another few of his signature cock-ups and I'm sure they'll be ready to leave.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by Toddler Thork on June 24, 2021, 11:42:22 PM »

Why do you think having an opinion is the same thing as believing others' opinions shouldn't matter?

If you concede that your opinions don't matter, I shall respectfully agree and we can move on.

Quite a lot has changed for Scotland. Is that what you mean by "stable"?

Scotland never really understood what being a nation was. They are more a collection of tribes whose only real bond is mutual jealousy of their more prosperous and successful neighbours to the South. England is stable. France is Stable. Portugal is stable. Scotland is a basket case.

Germany has 19% of the population of the EU. I know you're having trouble counting today, but 19% is significantly less than the 50% needed for them to "rule" a democracy.

If you don't understand how Germany dominates Europe and the EU via its leverage in the EU, its banks, its trade, its corporations etc, then you won't understand everyone else's fear of getting crushed by them. Germany is the biggest most powerful country in the EU and it flexes its muscles all the time. It imposed the troika on Greece, it imposed the migrant crisis on Italy, refused to let the EU help out Spain, it told Hungary they must take refugees after Germany had the reckless open door immigration policy and when Hungary refused, the Germans pushed to block their regional development funds. And now Germany wants to get rid of the power of veto so that "smaller countries cannot get in the way of policy of larger countries". Germans hold all the top jobs in Europe and the Euro is geared for Germany's economy at the expense of everyone else ... keeping low export costs for German manufacturers and burying those with debts. They control everything. You never read the links I provide but you should read the one below and understand the fear of Germany.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-german-takeover-of-the-eu-is-accelerating

You can identify me however you like, but I don't have to care. I should have an Irish passport by this time next year, but even if I turn out not to qualify by some technicality, next year will be my fifth year in the Netherlands. That means I'll be eligible to naturalise as a Dutch citizen. Either way, I will be an EU citizen by 2023 and I don't intend to look back.

You can stick a Ferrari badge on a Citroen. Its still the same piece of shit underneath.

I'm not interested in the UK beyond the border in Ireland holding back European integration. Just give us Ulster back, you can have your sOvEreIgNtY, and we'll have our glorious United States of Europe.

No. You don't get to annex a part of the UK. How about we get the rest of Ireland back? It used to be ours. Ulster has never ever been a part of the EU ever. So there is nothing to give back. Why would we give Ulster to Germany?

We didn't lose a war. We VOTED to leave. We don't have to hand over territory and we won't.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by xasop on June 24, 2021, 11:08:01 PM »

So they should be united against their will because you like the notion? Noted.

Why do you think having an opinion is the same thing as believing others' opinions shouldn't matter?

Mmmm. Really nothing changed. We still run everything from Westminster as we have for 1000 years. Adding Scotland to our country isn't really destabilising it. It is more bolting a vassal to it.

Quite a lot has changed for Scotland. Is that what you mean by "stable"?

Yes, I know. Again, we are the country that does that and everyone else copies. and it's a great system. But your thread is about throwing 1000 years of hard won rights in the bin, and federalising the nation into a German superstate.

Do I really need to explain this again? Here, have a recycled reply.

Germany has 19% of the population of the EU. I know you're having trouble counting today, but 19% is significantly less than the 50% needed for them to "rule" a democracy.

I don't even know what you are arguing at this point. You've ceased to be coherent.

I'm not arguing anything. I'm explaining why your misuse of the word "country" caused you to become confused.

I don't give a squirrel's scrotum how you identify. YOU don't get to identify yourself. Other people do the identifying and if you look like Ned Kelly and sound like Ozzy Man, I'm going to identify you as an Aussie.

You can identify me however you like, but I don't have to care. I should have an Irish passport by this time next year, but even if I turn out not to qualify by some technicality, next year will be my fifth year in the Netherlands. That means I'll be eligible to naturalise as a Dutch citizen. Either way, I will be an EU citizen by 2023 and I don't intend to look back.

One would hope having spent many years in Australia, you'd realise how absurd making Australia into part of Federal China is. Every bit as absurd as making the UK into a part of Federal Europe.

I'm not interested in the UK beyond the border in Ireland holding back European integration. Just give us Ulster back, you can have your sOvEreIgNtY, and we'll have our glorious United States of Europe.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by Toddler Thork on June 24, 2021, 10:39:22 PM »

This is not true at all. The Flemish do not want to be unified with the Netherlands at all and opinion polling shows that. You just made that up to suit your narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Netherlands_ideology#Opinion_polling

I didn't say a majority of the Flemish wanted it, I said it was the goal of (some in) the Flemish nationalist movement. That movement is based on a shared culture and language.

So they should be united against their will because you like the notion? Noted.

Now you are saying I'm implying that it is stable ... well it is. Some of these countries ... mine included, span a thousand years or more. Find me a thousand year old federation and we'll talk.

The state in which you live (whether it is a nation-state is dubious at best) is about 200 years old, as we've established. You are carefully switching between the terms "nation" and "country" to take advantage of the confusion your government has created with the marketing term "country of countries", so let's be precise and avoid the word "country".

Mmmm. Really nothing changed. We still run everything from Westminster as we have for 1000 years. Adding Scotland to our country isn't really destabilising it. It is more bolting a vassal to it.

There's no need to choose another man's wife for him. A better solution, the one you ended up with, is not to let one man choose who runs the country by marriage in the first place.

Why are you advocating that we do the exact thing we already do? We know ... we already do that.

This is the second time you've brought up the Magna Carta, and I'm beginning to think you don't actually know what it's about. It was a great step forward for its time, but it didn't bring about democracy overnight. England didn't achieve anything remotely resembling modern democracy until several centuries later.

Yes, I know. Again, we are the country that does that and everyone else copies. and it's a great system. But your thread is about throwing 1000 years of hard won rights in the bin, and federalising the nation into a German superstate.

We were speaking in the context of nation-states, and internationally, the terms "country" and "state" are generally synonymous. You are capitalising on your government's ludicrous "country of countries" stance to muddy the waters.

I don't even know what you are arguing at this point. You've ceased to be coherent.

I don't identify with Australian culture

Of course you don't. You've taken a poo in the Netherlands and now you are a European. 

I don't give a squirrel's scrotum how you identify. YOU don't get to identify yourself. Other people do the identifying and if you look like Ned Kelly and sound like Ozzy Man, I'm going to identify you as an Aussie. One would hope having spent many years in Australia, you'd realise how absurd making Australia into part of Federal China is. Every bit as absurd as making the UK into a part of Federal Europe.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by xasop on June 24, 2021, 10:23:27 PM »

This is not true at all. The Flemish do not want to be unified with the Netherlands at all and opinion polling shows that. You just made that up to suit your narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Netherlands_ideology#Opinion_polling

I didn't say a majority of the Flemish wanted it, I said it was the goal of (some in) the Flemish nationalist movement. That movement is based on a shared culture and language.

What? You said there were no nations and that it was a modern creation. I showed this to be more made up nonsense from you.

I was talking about nation-states, not nations, and I acknowledged that I could have chosen my words better. Why are you pointing out what I said again, after I corrected myself?

Now you are saying I'm implying that it is stable ... well it is. Some of these countries ... mine included, span a thousand years or more. Find me a thousand year old federation and we'll talk.

The state in which you live (whether it is a nation-state is dubious at best) is about 200 years old, as we've established. You are carefully switching between the terms "nation" and "country" to take advantage of the confusion your government has created with the marketing term "country of countries", so let's be precise and avoid the word "country".

There was no self-determination for the English people before England became a constitutional monarchy — they had no vote for whom their unelected kings married.

Why would we choose another man's wife for him? This is the British Isles. Not Love Island.

There's no need to choose another man's wife for him. A better solution, the one you ended up with, is not to let one man choose who runs the country by marriage in the first place.

In 1215AD we get the magna carter. From that point on ... English peasants have a say.

This is the second time you've brought up the Magna Carta, and I'm beginning to think you don't actually know what it's about. It was a great step forward for its time, but it didn't bring about democracy overnight. England didn't achieve anything remotely resembling modern democracy until several centuries later.

I never said it was a nation state. You said my COUNTRY has only been around for 200 years. I disputed that. My country ... England, has been around much longer. Now you are arguing against a thing I never said.

We were speaking in the context of nation-states, and internationally, the terms "country" and "state" are generally synonymous. You are capitalising on your government's ludicrous "country of countries" stance to muddy the waters.

Also, I made a suggestion for Australia ... I feel like you ignored it.

I propose that New Zealand and Australia become part of the Federation of China. I mean, they are all near each other in the Pacific and it would allow people to travel between them all without passports. Many Chinese already live in Australia so really it just makes sense. Plus think of all the great food. The nation state seems to be dead anyhow. Joining China seems to be the only sensible option available to Australia ... you know, now that we've accepted that the nation state is impossible. Enjoy your fried bat and dog sandwiches.

I don't know why you think repeatedly bringing up Australia makes any difference to me. I was not born in Australia, I do not live in Australia, I have no intention of ever returning to live in Australia, and I don't identify with Australian culture. Australia is not my country.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by Toddler Thork on June 24, 2021, 09:59:05 PM »

They, or at least some Flemish nationalists, are looking to be reunited with the Netherlands. They don't want to be part of Belgium. If we put the Netherlands and Belgium into the same European superstate, everyone gets their way.

This is not true at all. The Flemish do not want to be unified with the Netherlands at all and opinion polling shows that. You just made that up to suit your narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Netherlands_ideology#Opinion_polling

The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.

Ancient Greece went through a variety of different forms of government at different times, Rome was absorbing other nations long before it became an empire, Portugal — though nominally independent — has had many Spanish kings, and Japan has been repeatedly divided and reunified over the centuries. It is true that I should have said that the idea of a democratic nation-state hasn't been commonplace until the last couple of centuries, but even then, it certainly hasn't been as stable as you are implying.

What? You said there were no nations and that it was a modern creation. I showed this to be more made up nonsense from you. Now you are saying I'm implying that it is stable ... well it is. Some of these countries ... mine included, span a thousand years or more. Find me a thousand year old federation and we'll talk.

There was no self-determination for the English people before England became a constitutional monarchy — they had no vote for whom their unelected kings married.

Why would we choose another man's wife for him? This is the British Isles. Not Love Island.
In 1215AD we get the magna carter. From that point on ... English peasants have a say.

What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.

I don't think you understand what a unitary state is. The internal subdivisions of the UK are irrelevant, and England's existence as such a subdivision does not make it a nation-state — it is a nation, but not a state.

I never said it was a nation state. You said my COUNTRY has only been around for 200 years. I disputed that. My country ... England, has been around much longer. Now you are arguing against a thing I never said.


Also, I made a suggestion for Australia ... I feel like you ignored it.

I propose that New Zealand and Australia become part of the Federation of China. I mean, they are all near each other in the Pacific and it would allow people to travel between them all without passports. Many Chinese already live in Australia so really it just makes sense. Plus think of all the great food. The nation state seems to be dead anyhow. Joining China seems to be the only sensible option available to Australia ... you know, now that we've accepted that the nation state is impossible. Enjoy your fried bat and dog sandwiches.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by xasop on June 24, 2021, 09:38:49 PM »

So these people aren't looking to be united under one umbrella ... ok, noted.

They, or at least some Flemish nationalists, are looking to be reunited with the Netherlands. They don't want to be part of Belgium. If we put the Netherlands and Belgium into the same European superstate, everyone gets their way.

Look ... a war took place lasting almost 100 years over this. There was much terrorism. Many people died. We sorted it out ... its called the Good Friday agreement. Its done. We aren't going back on that or we'll be back at war.

You have already jeopardised the GFA, while celebrating the achievement. You don't have the moral high ground here.

The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.

Ancient Greece went through a variety of different forms of government at different times, Rome was absorbing other nations long before it became an empire, Portugal — though nominally independent — has had many Spanish kings, and Japan has been repeatedly divided and reunified over the centuries. It is true that I should have said that the idea of a democratic nation-state hasn't been commonplace until the last couple of centuries, but even then, it certainly hasn't been as stable as you are implying.

False. We had all those foreign royals not because they were defeating us, but because we arranged marriages to secure further powers and alliances. At no point in history have the Germans defeated us and put a German king on the throne. Nor the French. William the conqueror was a Norman ... descended from Vikings ... not gauls. The Dutch never beat us either nor the Spanish. Marriage is not 'the might of the sword'. Learn2diplomacy.

I am aware that not every monarch came to the throne through might, but these marriages were not arranged with input from the people of England, they were arranged by royal families only interested in keeping power for themselves, and those royal families gained their power through might in the first place. There was no self-determination for the English people before England became a constitutional monarchy — they had no vote for whom their unelected kings married.

What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.

I don't think you understand what a unitary state is. The internal subdivisions of the UK are irrelevant, and England's existence as such a subdivision does not make it a nation-state — it is a nation, but not a state.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Rama Set on June 24, 2021, 09:16:54 PM »

It's just funny to me that it takes this much malfeasance to lose your law license.

There's a whole team of lawyers in on this.  As far as I know they're still practicing law.  I'm starting to think that getting disbarred is an exceptionally rare event.

I’ve been listening to lawyers chatter on the topic since the election and the consensus is that disbarment is exceptionally rare and is almost exclusively limited to mishandling of client funds.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism

« Last post by Toddler Thork on June 24, 2021, 08:59:49 PM »

Other than religion, Flanders shares a language and culture with the Dutch but not with the Walloons, which is why there is a strong Flemish nationalist movement today.

So these people aren't looking to be united under one umbrella ... ok, noted.

They felt they had more in common with the English because the English planted them there to ensure dominance. Even so, they make up barely a majority of the population of Northern Ireland today, and they are easily a minority on the island of Ireland, which should never have been partitioned in the first place.

Look ... a war took place lasting almost 100 years over this. There was much terrorism. Many people died. We sorted it out ... its called the Good Friday agreement. Its done. We aren't going back on that or we'll be back at war.

The nation-state hasn't even existed for thousands of years. It is a modern invention, accompanying the rise of Western democracy.

The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.

For most of recorded history, Europeans were ruled by whoever had the mightiest sword, which is why England has had French, Spanish, Dutch and German kings over the centuries.

False. We had all those foreign royals not because they were defeating us, but because we arranged marriages to secure further powers and alliances. At no point in history have the Germans defeated us and put a German king on the throne. Nor the French. William the conqueror was a Norman ... descended from Vikings ... not gauls. The Dutch never beat us either nor the Spanish. Marriage is not 'the might of the sword'. Learn2diplomacy.

We don't accept it is impossible. I live in one. One that has not been invaded for over 1000 years.

Wrong again, even if we ignore the fact that your country has only existed for a little over 200 years.

What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state#United_Kingdom

World champions of war and empire. One with a Queen which we like.

Glad someone does. She's also the queen of Australia and we all think she's a bad joke.

That's because you've been given a foreign Queen. She's not even Australian. You've been utterly cucked.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by crutonius on June 24, 2021, 08:35:22 PM »

It's just funny to me that it takes this much malfeasance to lose your law license.

There's a whole team of lawyers in on this.  As far as I know they're still practicing law.  I'm starting to think that getting disbarred is an exceptionally rare event.